The Anglobitch Thesis contends that the brand of feminism that arose in the Anglosphere (the English-speaking world) in the 1960s has an ulterior misandrist (anti-male) agenda quite distinct from its self-proclaimed role as ‘liberator’ of women.

Wednesday, 30 December 2015

The following case
encapsulates perfectly the current state of gender-relations in the
Anglosphere. A narcissistic, grasping British woman opted for death rather than
live beyond the age of fifty as ‘poor’, ‘ugly’ and ‘old’. Stating things
in the simplest terms, her pussy pass had expired and she could not
endureexistence without it:

Woman’s Right to Die Upheld

A
50-year-old woman who fears that the passing of her youth and beauty
means the end of everything that “sparkles” in life has been granted
permission to die by the court of protection. In a highly
unusual judgment published this week, King’s College Hospital NHS Trust
has been told that the unnamed woman has the capacity to make up her
own mind and is entitled to refuse the life-saving kidney dialysis
treatment she requires.

The decision includes a detailed account
of the lifestyle of C, as the woman is known, describing her as
“impulsive”, “self-centred”, heavy drinking and four times married. But
the judge, Mr Justice MacDonald, explained that the principle was the
same for any patient. “The right to refuse treatment extends to
declining treatment that would, if administered, save the life of the
patient,” he said in his court of protection decision.

MacDonald
continued: “C is a person to whom the epithet ‘conventional’ will never
be applied … C has led a life characterised by impulsive and
self-centred decision-making without guilt or regret. [She] has had four
marriages and a number of affairs and has, it is said, spent the money
of her husbands and lovers recklessly before moving on when things got
difficult or the money ran out.

“She has, by their
account, been an entirely reluctant and at times completely indifferentmother to her three caring daughters. Her consumption of alcohol has
been excessive and, at times, out of control … In particular, it is
clear that during her life C has placed a significant premium on youth
and beauty and on living a life that, in C’s words, ‘sparkles’.”

Having
been diagnosed with breast cancer, she had taken an overdose with
alcohol. She did not die but caused herself such extensive kidney damage
that she required dialysis – which she now refused to undergo.

The
judge added: “My decision that C has capacity to decide whether or not
to accept dialysis does not, and should not prevent her treating doctors
from continuing to seek to engage with C in an effort to persuade her
of the benefits of receiving life-saving treatment in accordance with
their duty to C as their patient.

MacDonald analysed evidence from
psychiatrists and medics, and from one of the woman’s daughters. One
daughter told him that her mother’s life had “to all appearances” been
fairly glamorous. She said her mother did not want to be “poor”, “ugly”
or “old”.

“She has said the most important thing for her
is her sparkly lifestyle,” said the daughter. “She kept saying she
doesn’t want to live without her sparkle and she thinks she has lost her
sparkle.”

The UK Guardian 2015-12-30

The
case is interesting on a number of counts. Firstly, despite the
feminist rhetoric about ‘strong, independent women’ there are still plenty of
females whose dependence on men is so absolute that they would rather
die than relinquish their sexual leverage over the male sex. As always,
post-feminist women are perfectly happy to defend traditional gender
roles and lifestyles when they support their own innate tendencies to
hypergamy and material exploitation.

Moreover, their
sexual leverage remains considerable. We are endlessly told by tradcon
MRAs, PUAs and MGTOWs that women hit ‘the wall’ in their early thirties
and become instantly invisible to men thereafter. In this case, however,
the woman retained sufficient sexual power to continue fleecing lovers
and husbands well into her late thirties and forties. Only with fifty
and late middle age on the horizon did she finally opt for suicide. Up
to that time – and even after having three children – she was perfectly
capable of attracting a string of seemingly affluent males to sustain
her ‘sparkling’ lifestyle.

So much for the vaunted
‘wall’. In reality, attractive women are quite capable of exploiting
their sexual power over men long after thirty. Beauty treatments
mean they can retain their looks and superficial charm well into middle
age. Several psycho-sexual factors exclusive to the Anglosphere augment this agenda. The Anglo-American nations contain a relatively high
proportion of obese young women with poor personalhygiene, artificially
boosting the SMV of attractive older women. In Scandinavia, South
America or Eastern Europe attractive older women are effectively
suppressed by the relatively high levels of sexual competition from slim, comely girls. Further, the fact that most young Anglo-American females
have internalised feminist values further boosts the SMV of attractive
older women who possess more appealing ‘feminine’ attitudes. Simply put,
most young Anglo-Saxon females are now too misandrist, hostile and
frigid to sustain long-term heterosexual relationships of any kind.

Above
all else, the case justifies the smart, self-aware man’s fear of
attractive Anglo-American women. These husbands and lovers supporting her
‘sparkling’ lifestyle were discarded as so much trash when their money
ran out. The woman was also an appalling mother to her three children –
hardly to be wondered at, given her psychopathic narcissism. In sum, the
sensible man has nothing to lose and everything to gain by avoiding
attractive women raised in the Anglosphere. The only thing of worth they have to
offer – sex – can be handily acquired from prostitutes or foreign
women. As for the chimera of ‘love’, it is entirely obvious that Anglo
women love only themselves; and the man who cannot see this has signed
his own death warrant.

Sunday, 18 October 2015

Sometimes the Manosphere gets so bogged down in the minutiae of its arguments that we lose sight of what we are actually fighting for. Let's correct this:

A teenager took his own life after he was falsely accused of rape, an inquest heard. Jay Cheshire, 17, who was "mature and well-liked", was at the centre of
a police investigation which ended in June this year when the alleged
victim dropped the charge. But he tried to commit suicide a few weeks later and after being taken to Southampton General Hospital, died on 5 July. An inquest at Winchester Coroners Court, Hants, heard Jay struggled
to cope with the false accusations and was "absolutely distraught."

Jay, from Southampton, was a sixth form student at Bitterne Park School
studying English Literature, Film Studies and Geography - and hoped to
become a history teacher or a writer. The court also heard he
had a history of struggling with low moods, was put on anti-depressants
and was due to undergo cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT).

He had
a psychiatrist since the age of 13 but in March this year his state of
mind improved, leading to doctors agreeing that CBT was not urgently
needed any more. However in May, Jay's family contacted them once more saying he was under pressure because of the police investigation.

Central Hampshire senior coroner Grahame Short recorded a verdict of
suicide and said: "I got the impression he was well liked and mature in
some ways, but was a sensitive young man and vulnerable in some
respects and he found it difficult to cope with the police
investigation."

Jay's mum, Karin Cheshire, 54, said that the
allegation was a factor in his death and that the alleged victim said he
was a sex offender. Speaking about the alleged victim, she said: "She accused him of rape and said he was a sexual offender. He was absolutely distraught. Two weeks later she said she withdrew the allegations. He was a wonderful young man with a great love of history."

Source: UK Daily Telegraph

Predictably, Jay's accuser has got away 'scot-free' with her heinous crime - not even her identity was revealed by police. This is what should have happened to her:

Sunday, 4 October 2015

Only kidding - Chris Harper-Mercer was no warrior, by any definition. Shooting down defenceless college
students because one is a hardcore incel (involuntary celibate) hardly qualifies someone as Alexander
the Great. However, his case provides important insights
into this kind of crime and those who commit it.

I went to Wikipedia to find the major
spree-killings committed in the major Anglosphere blocs: the UK, the USA and
the former Commonwealth (Australia, New Zealand and Canada). The three lists
can be seen below, with long-term incel perpetrators marked in bold:

UK

1987
– Micheal Ryan – incel

1996
– Thomas Hamilton – gay paedophile, probable incel

2010 – Derrick Bird – non-incel

USA

1927 – Andrew Kehoe – non incel

1949
– Howard Unruh - incel

1958 – Charles Starkweather non-incel

1966 – Charles Whitman – non-incel

1984 – James huberty – non-incel

1986
– Patrick Sherrill – incel

1989
– Patrick Purdy - incel

1991 - James Pough – non-incel

1991
– George Hennard – incel

1999
– Klebold and Harris –incels

1999
– Larry Ashbrook - incel

1999 – Mark Barton – non-incel

2007
– Heung-Sui Cho - incel

2009
– Michael McLendon – incel

2009 – Nadal Hasan – non-incel

2009
– Liverly Wong – formerly married but probable incel at time of shootings

It is notable that recent UK killers seem to be older men, sexual
deviants as opposed to incels. Only one killer, the infamous Michael ‘Rambo’ Ryan,
fits the picture of an enraged young incel (he tried to rape a young mother
before embarking on his killing spree). The lack of British spree killers in
general demonstrates the efficacy of the UK’s anti-gun laws in preventing
such crimes – but I digress.

The US figures are especially interesting. Up
to the mid-1980s, spree-killings are generally executed by non-incels. After
the mid-1980s, incels sweep to the fore and come to dominate the ranks
of spree killers. Also, from that time on they are typically younger men in
their teens or early twenties. Mass murderers from earlier eras were often married,
middle-aged, sometimes even elderly. After the mid 80s, all that changes:
spree-killers become young, single and incel, almost overnight.

Commonwealth mass killers seem to follow a
similar pattern to their US counterparts, with killings up to the late 1980s
typically executed by non-incels. More recent mass killings are typically
performed either by incels or males in jeopardized relationships. The latter seem rather more likely to massacre family members than incel mass killers.

The prevailing Manosphere perspective claims that
feminism became a powerful force in the late 1960s or early 1970s, with women
free to exercise their hypergamous biological prerogatives from that time
onward. We would therefore expect to see the first generation of post-feminist
Anglosphere males hitting early adulthood around the mid-eighties.There would be many victimized and alienated incels
among this group, if our projections were correct.And in the US, this is clearly what we
observe. Not only that, there are far more
spree-killings in general from that time onward, almost two a year. We notice a
further escalation in 2007, perhaps reflecting the rise of the Internet and the
fall of the legacy media. Beyond this
date Sexual False Consciousness contracts as young males start to discuss real-world female behavior in online enclaves, free of feminist censure for the first time. Once that hegemonic breakdown occurs, spree-killing predictably becomes almost a regular event in the United States.

In general, the figures imply that the
mainstream media’s fixation with mass killers’ mental health is completely
irrelevant, at least in relation to contemporary mass murder. The dominant
precipitating factor for multiple murder is incel singleness or being in a
jeopardized relationship. Were complete figures available, I have no doubt they
would show far more incels among multiple murderers than the general male
population; and that involuntary celibacy is now the prime causal factor in
Anglo-American spree killings.

However, inceldom is but the tip of the
iceberg. History shows that men can endure incel status if they are provided
with adequate social or economic compensations (Medieval Catholic clergy being
a good example). However, this would require radical restructuring of the
Anglosphere – not likely to happen any time soon. Still, implementing the
following across the Anglo-American world would restore sufficient status to
alienated males to greatly reduce the incidence of incel spree-murders:

Make women
register for the Draft in the United States: an important symbolic statement showing true commitment to public gender-equality.

Legalize prostitution. A reform with countless self-evident benefits to both incel males and female sex workers.

Ensure proper
punishment for female criminals, especially female sex criminals. At present,
males are ten times more likely to receive a custodial sentence for a first
offence. If women want equal rights, let them lose their privileges.

All
anti-male propaganda in the Anglo media must be rooted out.

'Women only' resources/agencies must be eliminated or matched by similar investment in male
resources/agencies.

If Anglosphere governments were to implement
these reforms, many potential incel spree-killers would immediately be stripped
of the ideological motivations for their heinous and pointless crimes. However, the Anglosphere’s reflexive
neo-puritan misandry will doubtless prevent these simple, direct actions that could
save hundreds of lives.

Thursday, 27 August 2015

Various authorities continually tell us that western women adopted feminism to escape monogamous relationships with beta males in favour of polygamous relationships with alpha males. However, is it really true that most women aspire to liaisons with alpha males? After all, there is an alternative explanation: that women adopted feminism so they could shun men completely.

PUAs and conservative MRAs seem addicted to the notion that 80% of women have sex with the top 10-20% of men. Rather, could it be that many women harbour a puritanical loathing of sex and hate men in general? In this view, the feminist clamour for economic independence was ultimately motivated by a desire to write men out of women’s lives completely – a desire that has been fulfilled, to no small extent. Lower class women have sexually evicted men by marrying the Welfare State; middle class women have sexually negated men by achieving financial autonomy. For the most part, these women do not appear enamored of ‘alpha’ males , at all; they generally seem happy without men in their lives. Men of any kind, that is: alpha, beta or gamma.

The idea that women have comparable sex drives to men is rampant sexual false consciousness combined with wishful thinking. Of course, men want to believe such nonsense; the alternative perspective is too bitter, with too many troubling ramifications. Hence a situation has arisen wherein all men experience enormous ‘horizontal pressure’ to maintain a façade of sexual ease and plenty in their lives. For an adult male, publicly admitting to incel status is like admitting to homosexuality or even paedophilia.

Sometimes it takes a non-Anglo woman to bring a cold splash of rational truth to proceedings: Anglo males are too pussified. Academic Dr Catherine Hakim not only describes the massivesexual gulf between the sexes in her call for legalized prostitution - she also invokes the core tenets of the Anglobitch Thesis:

"Women have equality in the workplace, but they do not have they
equality in private relationships,” says Dr Hakim, whose previous book,
The New Rules, compared married men to “caged animals”.

“It’s a
shocking difference: men are twice as interested in sex as women and it
is the same around the world. Surveys show we see the male sex deficit
in Sweden, France, Spain, Japan and South America. It is
hard-wired into us: men, on average, are more highly sexed than women.
You can’t call it biological, as that implies it is animalistic: it
allows critics to dismiss it. It’s across all age groups, but
as soon as you hit 30, the gap starts growing dramatically. For a lot of
women, the decline in sexual interest is closely linked to having
children and they just don’t regain it afterwards. But the evidence is
it happens as we age even without children”.

Thus Dr Hakim argues older men are drawn to younger women not just for their looks, but for their libidos.

“With a 20-year age gap, you get women who have the same level of sexual interest as men,” she says. “You would expect that as women get richer and more powerful as they get older there would be a strong demand for buying toy boys – but there isn’t."

Dr Hakim claims the root problem is our “sex negative” mindset – and
adds it is North European and American feminist academics and
journalists who are most resistant to embracing the idea of female
sexual liberation through paid-for sex. In the West we still
have a problem that sex can be used for recreation,” she says. “All our
moral rules are based upon the fact that sexuality and fertility are
linked. Even since the contraceptive revolution in the 60s, we
still have one set of ethics that are tied to reproductive sexuality. We
need to recognise recreational sexuality as a completely separate
animal.

"Northern Europe and America – the Anglo Saxon cultures – are profoundly sex-negative, whereas southern Europe, Japan, China are sex positive cultures. It is very difficult to get more than a sour discussion in Britain.
I’ve been attacked by women for my views even though Amnesty
International have recommended decriminalisation, as have the United
Nations."

- Daily Telegraph, August 2015

Pretends to bang models every night...

However, the mainstream media hide this female indifference to recreational sex behind a carefully-maintained smokescreen of ‘Sexual False Consciousness’. By deploying Overton Window (excluding public opinions they deem unacceptable) in all its outlets, the media matrix covertly classifies anyone rejecting SFC as mad, deluded or deviant. As a result, we now have a bizarre situation where the average male’s sexual reality – one or zero partners a year – is viewed as idiomatic or eccentric. And anyone daring to break ranks on these issues is stigmatized as jaundiced and denied a public voice.

Mad but true.

How the 'Mainstream' Media dismisses dissenting perspectives...

The ‘rampant’ female sex drive is a core feature of Anglo-American SFC; and as its primary force, it has to be protected at all costs. In fact, even otherwise sensible MRAs can be vigorous in its defence. Of course, it is nonsense: women are low T creatures with little interest in recreational sex. However, the media's Overton Window invariably labels impartial scientific research on this issue ‘crazy’ or ‘deluded’; denies the obvious link between involuntary celibacy and mass murder sprees by single men; and generally tries to maintain the fiction that all western males are having sex with models three times a day. All this clouds our ability to consider the generic misandry at the core of Anglo-American feminism.

This is your life, according to the 'Mainstream' Media...

The primary goal of feminism has been to liberate women from financial dependence on men. This has resulted in a much higher proportion of men being single, since most women no longer require a male for financial support. Beyond this, female hypergamy in Anglo-Saxon nations has been inflated into generic misandry by Disney fairy tales and celebrity culture – for no man can live up to such unrealistic expectations, whoever he might be.

So, in de facto terms, Anglo-American feminism was designed to eliminate men from women’s lives; moreover, it has been highly successful in achieving this. Women do not seek alphas – they seek a mono-gendersociety where men do not exist (except, perhaps, as beasts of burden).

Friday, 7 August 2015

In recent months, the British media has become fixated on promoting
women’s ‘sport’. In particular, the England women’s football team has been
lionized in every quarter (they came third in the recent women’s FIFA World Cup
by beating Germany 1-0 by an extra-time penalty - big fucking deal).

Men are so physically superior to women that female ‘sport’ is, in
truth, a feminist version of the Paralympics. Women lack strength, stamina, spatial awareness or any competitive spirit; moreover, they lack the communal
skills men evolved for warfare and hunting that are so central to team sports. In
sum, the sight of androgynous harpies scuttling aimlessly up and down a field
remains utterly uninspiring to any right-thinking individual.

Third Place... so what?

Perhaps English-speaking countries have an ulterior reason for
promoting women’s sport, however. The harsh truth is that England and the other
English-speaking countries do not produce enough talented male athletes to win
authentic (i.e. male) international sporting events. In the 2014 World Cup, for
example, the men’s England soccer team were effectively ejected from their
first round qualifying group after a mere two matches.

Retired player Chris Waddle, part of the England side beaten on penalties by West
Germany in the semi-finals of the 1990 World Cup, blames a lack of world-class coaching:
"The Premier League is different to any league in the world and that is
our big problem. It's frustrating, because we have everything we need -
money, facilities - but it comes down to coaching, and we have to get
something right about producing players. The Premier League is a great advert for our football but it does our national team no good whatsoever."

Fair enough. Funny, though, how having a world class domestic soccer league has not stopped Spain winning everything in recent years...

I have an alternative explanation for the men's desultory performance. As residual misandry and the relentless march of Anglo-American
feminism reduce masculinity to a scorned addendum at the fringes of society, it
is no surprise that Anglosphere males have retreated from international
sporting contests. This obvious lack of athletic prowess creates a vacuum which
must be filled by something; even the
rank absurdity of women’s 'sport'.

Friday, 10 April 2015

Some of the
funniest, most incisive writings on Anglo-American men’s issues can be found on
the SlutHate forum (replacement for the ill-fated PUA Hate). These comments on
the Blue Pill Nonsense Parents Tell
their Kids show real insight:

"Stop worrying
about girls and they will be more attracted to you"

“Females will flock
to you when you get a good education and a stable job!”

"Money can't
buy you love"

"There's
someone for everyone"
"You'll find that special girl soon"

“Just be yourself”
“Looks don't really matter”

All well and good.
But what the radicalized manosphere calls ‘Blue Pill Nonsense’ is really better described as Sexual
False Consciousness. The latter concept has much greater depth and explanatory
power because it is rooted in a long-standing body of discourse originating in
the 19th century, not something recently devised to cope with the vagaries of
female mate-choice.

What is false consciousness? For Karl
Marx, false consciousness denoted the widespread tendency for low-status,
exploited people to ‘buy into’ the values/ideology of the ruling elite. Of
course, the elite use all their power to maintain false consciousness –
compulsory state education and the mainstream media represent the two potent
mechanisms of mass indoctrination. Not, of course, that Marxism is
a viable philosophy; only in this narrow area has it value or significance.

Noam Chomsky has applied the
concept to modern America, showing how the Anglo-American media ‘manufacture’
consent for foreign wars, coercive policing and other abuses. The Italian
neo-Marxist Antonio Gramsci pushed the concept of false consciousness in
another, more abstract direction: he argued that advanced societies were forged
from ideological ‘cement’ called ’hegemony’. Consisting of language, laws,
conventions and customs, hegemony represents ‘common sense’ at any given moment.
Of course, national hegemony is subject to continual revision: in 50s America,
marriage and heterosexuality was immutablenorms, not mere lifestyle choices.
And while provisional acceptance of a given hegemony represents a certain
degree of false consciousness, coercion of the masses can never be total.

The manosphere has a specific
interest in defining gender relations in Red Pill/Blue Pill terms, of course.
However, even this development is not entirely new. The British crime writer Colin
Wilson developed the concept of ‘sexual disenfranchisement’ several decades before
the Manosphere even existed. He argued that men have traditionally displayed
status via wealth, power or even spiritual standing. However, in the modern era
they principally display their status via sexual conquests of the young and
beautiful. In short, the American Dream has become the American Sexual Dream. Consequently,
the nature of revolt has changed. When wealth was the principal source of
social status, revolutionaries like Che Guevara clamored for economic equality.
However, now sex is the chief marker of social status, revolutionaries see the equalization
of sexual resources (typically young women) as their main goal (PUAs are a good
example of this trend).

Young Women: the Glittering Prizes of Post-Modern Society

Hence, in the modern era
‘sexually disenfranchised’ men are the principal revolutionary force in
advanced industrial nations.According
to Wilson, sex criminals are males who have seen through the hegemonic smoke
screens erected by the mainstream media; and, having realized their sexual
exclusion, set about remedying it via sex crime (or, more recently, game). In other words, they
have rejected the Blue Pill of sexual false consciousness for the Red Pill of strenuous resistance. Wilson calls this
process of realization ‘switching on the dark’.

Redefining the MRA Blue Pill as
sexual false consciousness greatly expands its explanatory power.The Manosphere is no mere collection of incel
misfits – it is a counter-hegemonic movement. Males such as Elliott Rodger or
Cho Hui Seung were not mere psychotics – before death, they achieved a certain
insight into their sexually disenfranchised condition. And the Anglosphere's myth of universal sexual
liberation/bounty is no mere chimera – it is a contrived hegemonic narrative
maintained by the elite to nullify the male masses.

And so on.

Sexual false consciousness is the
erotic expression of the American Dream and it serves the same purpose in
neutralizing the masses as its economic counterpart. Low income Americans vote Republican because they
spuriously believe they are only ‘temporarily’ poor; that someday, despite all
evidence to the contrary, they can be rich. Like the American Dream, SFC encounters
little resistance because most American males have bought into the delusion they
can achieve it. And because the sexual rewards for success are so alluring (and
the price of failureso catastrophic), they cannot accept that most of them will
never have sex with actresses, models and other attractive women. Like the blue-collar schlubs who seriously think they have a
chance with models and actresses, the average American male would sooner wallow
in delusions of sexual success than accept his incel/landwhale-fuckingreality.

Blue Collar Imbeciles Wallowing in SFC

The dream of sexual success hangs
before every American man like a shimmering mirage, binding his consent to
elite narratives even as he studies and toils. In fact, SFC is now the true
opiate of the male masses; their primary existential motivation.

Interestingly, Philip K Dick saw
his sci fi novels as metaphors for false consciousness and counter-hegemonic
resistance. The Pill trope had its first cinematic outing in
Total Recall, a film inspired by one of Dick’s short stories. In short, the
Blue Pill and sexual false consciousness have always been one and the same.